xbox360 SHARE THE CAMERA with an ONLINE person

[Labadal]

That would be catastrophic for 4 player co-op.

[C2B]

Yeah, thats now actually pretty bad. I hope they can patch this out and is not a technical limitation of Onyx. Because it seems to be finally a workable/stable engine for Obsidian.

[MonkeyLungs]

Creating a solid multiplayer component was not the focus of the developers on this title. They should have just made it a single player game. Reviewers love to shred Obsidian games to pieces and this is going to hurt this title.

 

HOW DO YOU PEOPLE GET JOBS MAKING GAMES WHEN YOU MAKE SUCH HORRIBLE DECISIONS? WTF Feargus????!!!

[Matt-C]

They should have just made it a single player game.

 

and left 'Dungeon Siege' out of the title.

[lethale123]

yes, i just got done playing online coop with a buddy of mine. the problem isn't sharing a camera. you still have control over your own rotation of the camera... the problem is the fact that your tethered. also its a fixed distance from your character...this is going to be a huge problem with 4 people on the screen. i just don't understand why they were being so secretive on the way the online multiplayer worked. all in all i had the game and the guide on preorder, but i'm definitely not buying day one after this demo.

[Matt-C]

yes, i just got done playing online coop with a buddy of mine. the problem isn't sharing a camera. you still have control over your own rotation of the camera... the problem is the fact that your tethered. also its a fixed distance from your character...this is going to be a huge problem with 4 people on the screen. i just don't understand why they were being so secretive on the way the online multiplayer worked. all in all i had the game and the guide on preorder, but i'm definitely not buying day one after this demo.

 

Yes I've changed my mind too, this game will be in the bargain bin after a month, will pick it up then for lols.

[Pidesco]

This would be a problem if the camera was exclusively controlled by and centered on the host. It isn't, though.

 

Unless I'm missing something, the camera is independently controlled on different machines, it's just that the players are tethered to each other, being unable to distance themselves too much from each other. This makes sense as it isn't an online game in the fashion of Diablo. It's a plot based game where the players are supposed to enjoy the plot and combat encounters together. It would be silly to allow one player to forge ahead while the others stayed behind, as that would force the player forging ahead to fight through encounters designed for multiple characters, and it would mean the other players would, essentially, not play the game at all. That, coupled with potential problems arising from absent players during dialogue and quests means that a tethered was really the only logical option.

 

This isn't Sacred 2.

[ShadowScythe]

Just wondering for people who've played, how far away can a player run back? I mean as Reinhart I'd probably want to hang back and assist the other players so just how far back can I go before the game pulls me in.

[Matt-C]

This isn't a good game.

 

There fixed it for you

[Pidesco]

Yes, it's pretty clear that if a game isn't in the genre you want, then you don't consider it a good game.

[Draganta]

This would be a problem if the camera was exclusively controlled by and centered on the host. It isn't, though.

 

Unless I'm missing something, the camera is independently controlled on different machines, it's just that the players are tethered to each other, being unable to distance themselves too much from each other. This makes sense as it isn't an online game in the fashion of Diablo. It's a plot based game where the players are supposed to enjoy the plot and combat encounters together. It would be silly to allow one player to forge ahead while the others stayed behind, as that would force the player forging ahead to fight through encounters designed for multiple characters, and it would mean the other players would, essentially, not play the game at all. That, coupled with potential problems arising from absent players during dialogue and quests means that a tethered was really the only logical option.

 

This isn't Sacred 2.

 

Agreed.

 

Imagine this: You are tracking back to gather some missing loot, suddenly, a cutscene starts, in an environment you have never seen before. The people are talking about stuff, you have no idea what. Because you missed the scene because of the backtracking. I think they made a good choice. This game is meant for everyone to be a certain experience. Like a movie.

 

And besides, whiners should get their facts right, there is no shared camera at all. There is just a limit of how far a party can seperate. All 4 players are in this together, doesn't make sense if they all go their own path.

[Labadal]

I'm ok with that. I don't mind if we have to stick together as long as I can control my own camera. That was the only thing that scare me when I read impressions yesterday.

[Sannom]

And besides, whiners should get their facts right, there is no shared camera at all. There is just a limit of how far a party can seperate. All 4 players are in this together, doesn't make sense if they all go their own path.

 

I whine loudly when someone in the know gives us what feels like incomplete info so that someone else, also in the know, can tell us the exact facts .

 

I'm ok with that. I don't mind if we have to stick together as long as I can control my own camera. That was the only thing that scare me when I read impressions yesterday.

 

Same here. Just hope that the zoom is high enough!

[rafoca]

Not just that but we will be the ones who tell our friends about it and ultimately become salesmen (or women) for the games we back.

 

That is true. I have 100 friends in my xbox live list, but I am the most active in the forums out there. It is basically me that give the friends info on games. When I told them about how the camera and co-op would work, a lot of them got disappointed. But I like to tell them because here, in Brazil, we pay almost 3 times the price you guys pay in America and EU, so peoploe here must know what they are buying.

[rafoca]

yes, i just got done playing online coop with a buddy of mine. the problem isn't sharing a camera. you still have control over your own rotation of the camera... the problem is the fact that your tethered. also its a fixed distance from your character...this is going to be a huge problem with 4 people on the screen. i just don't understand why they were being so secretive on the way the online multiplayer worked. all in all i had the game and the guide on preorder, but i'm definitely not buying day one after this demo.

 

Several people here, including me, knew that not talking too much about online functions was weird. I

[MonkeyLungs]

Tethering the players together is pointless design. Having such limited multiplayer is going to hurt this game in sales. This isn't me being hyperbolic, this is the truth. This is why they tried to hide the info on MP for so long bec ause they know it is lackluster.

 

Having a nice 20 hour story is all well and good but games that stand the test of time do so on their gameplay. Everyone out here in the NEWFAN video game "I like RPG's!" world that eats up this 'cinematic experience' and 'this is different kind of co-op, we're in it together, the game is ddesigned for a very specific experience' are just doing harm to gaming as a whole. After you play that 20 hour story a few times (maybe some of you - ie. a TINY fraction- will actually play through 4 times) then you are just going to put this game on the shelf and wait for the next hyped up lack of substance game. And people will still be playing Diablo 2.

[Gfted1]

Gah, I remember "tethered" co-op from the LEGO Star Wars games. You could literally drag the other player around if they stopped moving or when they were actively moving in the opposite direction as you it would stall the progress with each player just running in place against an invisible wall. Very frustrating.

[Alpha]

Agree with Pidesco.

[blueboykc]

Tethering the players together is pointless design. Having such limited multiplayer is going to hurt this game in sales. This isn't me being hyperbolic, this is the truth. This is why they tried to hide the info on MP for so long bec ause they know it is lackluster.

 

Having a nice 20 hour story is all well and good but games that stand the test of time do so on their gameplay. Everyone out here in the NEWFAN video game "I like RPG's!" world that eats up this 'cinematic experience' and 'this is different kind of co-op, we're in it together, the game is ddesigned for a very specific experience' are just doing harm to gaming as a whole. After you play that 20 hour story a few times (maybe some of you - ie. a TINY fraction- will actually play through 4 times) then you are just going to put this game on the shelf and wait for the next hyped up lack of substance game. And people will still be playing Diablo 2.

thats actually a pretty brilliant point..im no where near as concerned about the story as i am the way the game plays..

[Xiaolin]

Okay so camera isn't technically shared. But the single player zoom is removed so the only control you have is over rotation. Loot and Gold defintely are though.

 

I understand that they went with a story centric focus with this game, what I don't understand is why they would choose to do MP in a way that nearly everyone will dislike. It is painfully obvious they put as little effort into MP as possible, and that just blows my mind. Dungeon crawlers are always going to be judged on the MP. ALWAYS. This is Obsidian setting themselves up for failure. Seirously, why do this?? This focus on single player content over MP is a TERRIBLE decision on thier part and I know it's the reason me and my friends will pass on this.

 

This is NOT a Dungeon Siege game. They would have done much better to use a new/different ip, and/or format.

[Matt-C]

This is NOT a Dungeon Siege game.

Quoted for truth

[kingorune]

i have a good question the online multiplayer can have 2-4 people when u see 2 people in the demo in a game it looks like u wont beable to fit 4 players on a screen

[tangmcgame]

I understand that they went with a story centric focus with this game, what I don't understand is why they would choose to do MP in a way that nearly everyone will dislike.

I'd like to see where you got the data that suggests "nearly everyone" will dislike the multiplayer. I know that's the prevailing sentiment on the forums, but it may surprise you to learn that people who go on forums to talk about games are a tiny minority of the people that actually play the games. This small group often has some of the strongest opinions of what a game should be, and generally people are most likely to offer an opinion when it is negative. That is, people who don't like something are more likely to log on and say so than people who don't.

 

It is painfully obvious they put as little effort into MP as possible, and that just blows my mind.

This is both completely unfounded and offensive (unless you're holding the information about how many hours were logged for each portion of the project). They put tons of effort into the multiplayer, I'm sure. They just didn't make it the way you wanted it to be and you're choosing to (once again) express that disappointment in a way meant to demean the people you perceive to have ruined "your" game.

 

Dungeon crawlers are always going to be judged on the MP. ALWAYS. This is Obsidian setting themselves up for failure. Seirously, why do this?? This focus on single player content over MP is a TERRIBLE decision on thier part and I know it's the reason me and my friends will pass on this.

Torchlight? It's generally regarded as a very good dungeon crawler and yet it has NO multiplayer whatsoever. Sure, that's the biggest criticism of the game, but the lack of multiplayer hasn't stopped it from becoming a massive success. I would offer that dungeon crawlers are judged on how good or bad they are. Based on the demo, DS 3 looks to be a pretty good or even great dungeon crawler.

 

This is NOT a Dungeon Siege game. They would have done much better to use a new/different ip, and/or format.

This is debatable as some people want sequels with a strict adherence to the games before it in terms of gameplay whereas some other people are in favor of experimentation and new approaches. I can't say you're wrong on this point, but I don't think you're right.

Edited June 4, 2011 by tangmcgame

[Oner]

i have a good question the online multiplayer can have 2-4 people when u see 2 people in the demo in a game it looks like u wont beable to fit 4 players on a screen

Camera zooms out more when there's 4 players.

[sorophx]

effectively turning DS3 into an oldschool RTS